[pembrook]

Agreed, SEPA is objectively better than what the US has.

But it doesn’t matter how easy it is the transfer money if you increasingly don’t have any.

On average, governments in the EU centrally direct roughly 40% more economic activity than the U.S. (and Chinese) government does.

In the short term, this appears more efficient. Allowing markets and decentralized private players to sort things out is messy and aesthetically unpleasing at times (like democracy), but leads to greater growth and innovation overall. The Chinese Communist Party understands this, maybe the Eurocrats will figure this one out after a few more 6-course dinners in Brussels.

[pyrale]

Please explain to me how efficient the US health care system is.

That’s right, it’s part of the money handled by public entities in my country, and "decentralized" in the US. Personally I don’t want any of the kind of "growth" the US has experienced in their health sector.

[pembrook]

Nothing about US healthcare resembles a free market in any sense of the word.

The US in fact has government healthcare for anyone over 65, anyone under 22, anyone disabled, anyone who has been in the military, and anyone who is poor (essentially half the population).

The other half outside the government system is nothing like a free market either, due to the existence of the first half combined with well-meaning policies that ultimately create the worst kind of adverse incentives.

That said, the US funds basically half of global medical research while Europe funds only a third while having double the population. So again, the EU centralized government system is absolutely more efficient overall, but the messy (only slightly more decentralized) US system drives far more innovation.